Teaching and Learning Development and Peace-Building with Cases 35-50

Teaching and Learning Development and Peace-Building with Cases 35-50 Teaching and Learning Development and Peace-Building with Cases Katsuhiko Mori * I. WHY ACTIVE LEARNING? “Democratization” and “sustainable development” were the two main keywords in the post-Cold War world. “Participatory development,” the concept of combining these two keywords, became the leading strategy in the international development community in the 1990s. This concept led to the cutting edge of “active learning” in educational contexts, and “action research” in research activities in the field of international development. When active learning pedagogies, including the case method of teaching, became popular in Japanese universities in the early 1990s there was some criticism that these active learning methods were Western-oriented and therefore not effectively applicable to the non-Western educational contexts of Japan and Asia.(1) This criticism missed the point, because an equivalent of active learning can also be found in the non-Western philosophy of Confucius. According to The Doctrine of the Mean, learning and studying are regarded as the first two of the five steps toward actions for social change.(2) The first step is to “learn widely.” Japanese universities typically offer four-year undergraduate programs. In many instances, the education curriculum designed for first-year students focuses on general education, where new students are exposed to a wide range of academic subjects. In order to pursue higher education in peace and development studies, it is important for students to study not only social sciences but also humanities and natural sciences so that they can develop the basis for applying imagination, communication, and logical * Professor, Department of Politics and International Relations 35 Teaching and Learning Development and Peace-Building with Cases and critical thinking. Recently, the worrying indications of deterioration in the academic performance of university students in Japan have been highlighted — but I am not concerned about rebuilding the curricula to encompass a wide variety of academic knowledge. What does concern me is developing the capacity of what Confucius called “asking thoroughly,” which is the second step of academic inquiry. It is vital for students of peace and development studies to generate their own appropriate questions, such as “Why do some countries achieve phenomenal economic growth, while others still have difficulties in eradicating poverty?” and “Why are some projects successful in sustaining peace and development, while others perform poorly?” According to Sadako Ogata, former United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, “Whether or not it is the right answer is not the problem. Rather, what the most important is to ask the right question.”(3) In other words, if you ask the right questions, you can get the right answers. The real question to ask is how to develop the capacity to ask the right questions. Assuming that the right question was asked, the next step is the third stage of “considering carefully” when answering the question. To do this requires the incorporation of knowledge from many disciplines, such as political science, economics, sociology, and anthropology. In many universities, students write graduation theses in their fourth year. After the first three steps of learning, asking, and considering, it is in the fourth step that students should be able to “understand clearly” that the answer to the research question in a senior thesis is a compilation of all the studies in the four years of university life. It is important to be confident in one’s answers, and yet too much self- confidence leads to undue pride. Thus, Confucius suggested the fifth stage, which is to “act warm-heartedly” with respect to others. In short, learning and inquiry in the early stages lead to deliberation, understanding, and eventually action. In today’s rapidly changing global community, it is often pointed out that “soft power” or “word power” is 36 37 Teaching and Learning Development and Peace-Building with Cases relatively more important than military or economic power. To help students develop their “word power,” the focus should be placed not only on substantive but also on procedural aspects of the knowledge applications in the real community. These two underlying objectives call for active learning and active research. II. THE CASE METHOD AS INTERACTIVE LEARNING There are many active-learning methods, including debate, coaching, and service learning. The case method of teaching, one of the interactive pedagogies, has spread from its origins in American and European professional schools such as law and business. Unlike research case studies, teaching case studies are narrative stories in which normal real-world problems are reconstructed and described, but without clear answers being given. Students identify, analyze, and prescribe the problem in the case study through case-based discussions facilitated by the case teacher. In the field of international relations, following the Pew Faculty Fellowship in International Affairs at Harvard University, the Active Learning in International Affairs Section (ALIAS) of the International Studies Association (ISA) has been the forum for case teachers and writers. Harvard University’s Business School and the John F. Kennedy School of Government have published many case studies in a variety of topics, including international relations. The Institute for the Study of Diplomacy (ISD) in Georgetown University’s Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service has published international cases since 1991. In Japan, the Foundation for Advanced Studies on International Development (FASID) launched its case method workshop in the field of international development in 1992, and has published the FASID Case Library series since 1995. As in other countries, normal Japanese universities have long used the traditional “lecture,” wherein the teacher imparts a store of knowledge to students, who are thus passive learners. On the contrary, “seminars,” in which students initiate their own presentations, are regarded as student-oriented because the teacher can play the role of coach. However, in Japanese universities 36 37 Teaching and Learning Development and Peace-Building with Cases there has emerged a situation called “Lectures lead to whispering, seminars lead to silence.” This appears to mean that one-way lecturing (seemingly authoritarianism) leads to talking and whispering “revolutions” among students, whereas “student-oriented” seminars, which in actuality are sometimes teacher- oriented and filled with antirevolutionary guidance, lead to silence among students. In contrast, the case method of teaching and learning constructs knowledge in an interactive way. This cooperative learning is a practice of constructivism in international relations. It is said that the teacher here takes on the role of a “choreographer” rather than a teacher or coach. A classroom often resembles a virtual theatre, where students undertake role-play in the manner of actors and actresses. In this situation, the wisdom of the theatre is being constituted and constructed. Compared with traditional lectures and seminars, case-based discussions might be less efficient in terms of covering a wide range of substantive knowledge. However, the case method is more effective than lectures in internalizing and sustaining a meaningful range of substantive knowledge. Compared with general-purpose role-plays and simulations, which emphasize procedural aspects, case-based discussions can be more specific. Nevertheless, the case method of learning is also incorporated in procedural aspects of knowledge and wisdom. In this sense, the case method aims at seeking both substantive and procedural wisdom, and both sustainability and internalization. III. USE AND MISUSE OF CASE TEACHING In a culture where teaching cases are not prevalent, students as well as teachers still tend to confuse the two types of case studies — research cases and teaching cases. There should be a clear distinction between research cases, in which the authors have analyzed the problems and drawn conclusions, and teaching cases, in which the authors have described but not analyzed the problems. This is because, in the teaching cases, it is learners who define, analyze, and prescribe the problems. Thus, the use of research cases as “case studies” may not always provide 38 39 Teaching and Learning Development and Peace-Building with Cases active and interactive learning in the classroom. In addition, even the “use” of teaching cases may not always arouse interactive and cooperative learning if case teachers are not trained to facilitate discussions using appropriate pedagogies. According to Rangan, four types of teaching cases can be distinguished.(4) The first is lecturing on a case; that is, the teacher gives a lecture on the case material. If the teacher, rather than the learner, analyzes and explains the problem described in the case, it could be a misuse of the case material. The second type is the deductive use of a case. Before students read the case material, they are expected to be familiar with some theoretical frameworks or analytical tools through reading or attending lectures. This allows them to apply such instruments to analyze case studies and examine the gap between theory and reality. This deductive usage is often useful for learners to acquire some systematized knowledge, such as in development economics and logical frameworks

Load more